|
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
Jul 8 2005, 04:50 PM
Post
#1
|
|
|
http://ewanmclean.com Group: Members Posts: 203 Joined: 12-June 05 From: http://ewanmclean.com - Scotland, UK Member No.: 6,127 |
I have today set up an image host using my astahost account. There will be a limit on how much space I allow each user to take up, this will be decided once I see how much interest there is for the host. Please feel free to visit it and sign up here!
|
|
|
|
Jul 8 2005, 05:18 PM
Post
#2
|
|
|
Premium Member Group: Members Posts: 227 Joined: 25-April 05 Member No.: 4,369 |
It's cool, but to be honest, I prefere using Image Shack
|
|
|
|
Jul 8 2005, 05:32 PM
Post
#3
|
|
|
http://ewanmclean.com Group: Members Posts: 203 Joined: 12-June 05 From: http://ewanmclean.com - Scotland, UK Member No.: 6,127 |
Well, is Image Shack not like a proper, fully serviced thing rather than something put up because the webmaster had spare diskspace?
|
|
|
|
Jul 8 2005, 09:57 PM
Post
#4
|
|
|
Premium Member Group: Members Posts: 227 Joined: 25-April 05 Member No.: 4,369 |
Heh. I think that the only one way to avoid spam and pr0n is to control all the stuff people are submitting.
Well, that's what I think.... first do not turn this 'sign up" thingy off.. then you see if there's a lot of users who're signing up. If you have a descent number of registered members, so you don't need to turn it off Now if you see that nobody really want to sign in, then you try to turn it off and see what happens After all, it's always under your control. |
|
|
|
Jul 9 2005, 09:00 AM
Post
#5
|
|
|
http://ewanmclean.com Group: Members Posts: 203 Joined: 12-June 05 From: http://ewanmclean.com - Scotland, UK Member No.: 6,127 |
Nice advice, thanks a lot, I'll go turn it on just now. (I realised two minutes ago that it's off by default
|
|
|
|
Jul 9 2005, 10:34 AM
Post
#6
|
|
|
Premium Member Group: Members Posts: 311 Joined: 1-November 04 Member No.: 1,290 |
Imageshack is perfect for me, you can store your images and have a personal account which is just an adress which you can access from anywhere in the world without a password. The problem is with their new features, which they are charging quite a lot of money for which is just not worth is. I think they ought to make the free, since it's their dedicated userbase that brought them to the top.
|
|
|
|
Jul 9 2005, 04:05 PM
Post
#7
|
|
|
Newbie [ Level 1 ] Group: Members Posts: 3 Joined: 9-July 05 Member No.: 6,941 |
Imageschack is much better one
QUOTE mage types allowed: jpeg jpg png gif bmp tif tiff swf maximum image size: 1024 kilobytes http://www.imageshack.us/ |
|
|
|
Jul 9 2005, 04:23 PM
Post
#8
|
|
|
Advanced Member Group: Members Posts: 193 Joined: 4-April 05 Member No.: 3,615 |
I agree with everyone else Image Shack is the way to go when it comes to image hosting... But thanks for the offer anyway...
|
|
|
|
Jul 9 2005, 11:36 PM
Post
#9
|
|
|
http://ewanmclean.com Group: Members Posts: 203 Joined: 12-June 05 From: http://ewanmclean.com - Scotland, UK Member No.: 6,127 |
Lol, okay, can someone give me a definitive list of safe image extensions that can't be loaded with some destructive code or something, and a reasonable size limit, bearing mind I'd be giving about 75MB to the whole service if neccessary?
|
|
|
|
Jul 10 2005, 02:17 PM
Post
#10
|
|
|
Premium Member Group: Members Posts: 311 Joined: 1-November 04 Member No.: 1,290 |
Well 75MB is just 75 pictures of which are 1024KB
Therefore your best bet is to only allow images to be hosted whihc are very very small, for example 50KB or something for avatars and signiatuers. That way you would be able to host a decent number of images. You probably shouldn't allow uncompressed images becuase they are a pain on servers |
|
|
|
![]() ![]() |
Similar Topics
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 20th November 2008 - 09:07 PM |